Bruno Marchal wrote: > Le 19-oct.-06, à 13:58, 1Z a écrit : > > > > > > > David Nyman wrote: > >> 1Z wrote: > >> > >>> This *is* ecumenicism. The buck stops here. What higher > >>> court of appeal is there , than consideration of the nature of > >>> EVERYTHING? > >> > >> Touché! > >> > >>> If Bruno isn't reifying numbers, he's in trouble. > >> > >> And if the materialist isn't reifying the observables, he's right in > >> there with him. > > > > Obviously the materialist is reifying matter. > > But then we can *see* material things. > > > > You are lucky. I see *appearance* of matter, but I don't see existing > primary matter.
Just as I see numbers written in chalk on blackbaords, but not Platonically existing ones. >The existence of this one has to be postulated. But I > have already criticize your "non-definition" of primary matter. Just as I have criticised your non-definition of Platonic existence. > I find > that concept far more nebulous than consciousness for example, which > certainly exists as a receptacle of the appearance. I don't doubt about > those appearance. > > > > > > > Reification pers e is not the problem; the problem > > is reifying what is invisible/uninteractive. > > > I agree. Of course you think it applies ot primary matter, and I think it applies to Platonic objects. > Bruno > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---